It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AlienView
The Science Behind Intelligent Design Theory
"Intelligent design is a scientific theory which has its roots in information theory and observations about intelligent action. Intelligent design theory makes inferences based upon observations about the types of complexity that can be produced by the action of intelligent agents vs. the types of information that can be produced through purely natural processes to infer that life was designed by an intelligence or multiple intelligences. It makes no statements about the identity of the intelligent designer(s), but merely says that intelligent action was involved at some points with the origins of various aspects of biological life......."
www.ideacenter.org...
Again, from my eccentric viewpoint, scientific observation shows Evolution - And Intelligent Design says it has a meaning.
Everything that occurs in nature and the universe is based upon cause and effect and all causes and effects that can be
perceived by an intelligent mind must be based upon some form of intelligent action
There is no way you can completely separate your mind from what you are observing and if it is perceived by the
mind of an intelligent being it must posses properties of Intelligent Design
originally posted by: AlienView
The Science Behind Intelligent Design Theory
"Intelligent design is a scientific theory which has its roots in information theory and observations about intelligent action. Intelligent design theory makes inferences based upon observations about the types of complexity that can be produced by the action of intelligent agents vs. the types of information that can be produced through purely natural processes to infer that life was designed by an intelligence or multiple intelligences. It makes no statements about the identity of the intelligent designer(s), but merely says that intelligent action was involved at some points with the origins of various aspects of biological life......."
www.ideacenter.org...
Again, from my eccentric viewpoint, scientific observation shows Evolution - And Intelligent Design says it has a meaning.
Everything that occurs in nature and the universe is based upon cause and effect and all causes and effects that can be
perceived by an intelligent mind must be based upon some form of intelligent action
There is no way you can completely separate your mind from what you are observing and if it is perceived by the
mind of an intelligent being it must posses properties of Intelligent Design
originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: logicsoda
I said the exact opposite of this in many ways. In fact just what to you mean by intelligent?
Well for one you haphazardly read what I said and somehow did not read it at all just started writing some things which I did not say.
Its like I was talking about cheeseburgers and you sunddenly burst out saying " I like oranges" To which I would reply...Thats nice but the topic is cheeseburgers.
That is not possible, that is quite obvious...Duh! That would imply perfections.
And perfections do not exist in nature or anywhere else.
In fact even if there was some sort of all knowing and all powerful entity out there, it still would not be able to create a perfect thing.
What I am merely saying is that its also highly likely that some species some millions of years ago may have wondered by our little lonely somewhat blue world on a binge tour of the galaxy, and maybe somehow may have jacked off into the the ocean, which released its spermy life giving wonderton potential all through out the deeps, and then somehow millions of years later it lead to the first life in the oceans and eventually lead all of life that you see today.
For all you know we have some space traveling jack off to thank for being here experiencing the wonders of typing words on a screen and all the magical experiences that entail.
Me: I suppose we really are made in his image.
What the funk are you talking about? What does any of this have to do with gods or god or even any higher intelligence or being at all?
But if any of those things or entities did exist. I am pretty sure they would care about any of those things about as much as you would care about a toad or a fish born with some chronic illness or horrific defects,
So in that respect the respect that they would not give a flying # or two #z about any of us or would even notice any of this unless it was somehow benefiting them or intruding on something in there day.
originally posted by: charlyv
You cannot counter-point a religious based statement with a science based statement. It is like saying "Red is my favorite color, what is yours?" and the reply is "8".
originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: charlyv
To an extent that is all true. However, when I reply to someone like Whereislogic or raggedymandingo, its not for their benefit that I reply and attempt to give the appropriate science. It is for the people who lurk these forums without posting. The ones who may not have their mind boxed into a corner with no escape. They deserve to see both sides of the equation here so that if they are so inclined, they have the tools available to engage in due diligence and look into the questions and answers themselves and formulate their own opinions. This is a discussion forum on a public message board. The live and let live forum hasn't been proposed yet on ATS to my knowledge so as long as people are posting flat out lies, I'm going to call them out on it in case someone who has yet to make up their mind on the issue sees those lies and believes them.
originally posted by: logicsoda
originally posted by: charlyv
You cannot counter-point a religious based statement with a science based statement. It is like saying "Red is my favorite color, what is yours?" and the reply is "8".
Not really. If the religious-based statement is a fact claim then it of course can be countered with a scientific response.
Religious person: "Women were made from the rib of a man as it is said in the Holy Bible."
Scientific person: "False. The process of how 'women' were created is much more complex than that. Here's what science shows thus far...."
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: logicsoda
originally posted by: charlyv
You cannot counter-point a religious based statement with a science based statement. It is like saying "Red is my favorite color, what is yours?" and the reply is "8".
Not really. If the religious-based statement is a fact claim then it of course can be countered with a scientific response.
Religious person: "Women were made from the rib of a man as it is said in the Holy Bible."
Scientific person: "False. The process of how 'women' were created is much more complex than that. Here's what science shows thus far...."
Scientific person "false. The process of how...science shows thus far.....what
You left it blank, nothing, why
It's because that is all you have got, nothing, as stupid as a rib sounds it's more than nothing, the nothing science has got, nothing at all
Update the ats library with, evolution has no evidence, still
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Evolution is flat out lies, squat evidence, nothing, nothing at all, grasping at theory made up hundreds of years ago
and having to call me names, (surely raggedyman is bad enough), you have nothing and you know it
If anyone reading this hasn't made up their minds, ask for evidence, empirical evidence and listen to the atheists knees knock
Evolution is not a science, it's a religion for atheists
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Name calling, that's is an indication that you are in fear, what's there to be afraid of if you have all that scientific evidence on your side
That's right, you have none
Appropriate science doesn't start with "we assume"
Evolution is flat out lies, squat evidence, nothing, nothing at all, grasping at theory made up hundreds of years ago
and having to call me names, (surely raggedyman is bad enough), you have nothing and you know it
If anyone reading this hasn't made up their minds, ask for evidence, empirical evidence and listen to the atheists knees knock
Evolution is not a science, it's a religion for atheists
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Two complex for you to understand and explain, not to hard to believe though
a reply to: logicsoda
This demonstrates you don't know what faith is, believing based on no evidence, you believe micro evolution turns into macro evolution
You have not offered any empirical evidence, just a link to micro evolution.
Nothing, just a journey of faith, there is no evidence micro turns into macro, off you go I will be here
originally posted by: AlienView
And then the main problem with "The Theory of Evolution" - It is meaningless